Chart Thread

[Anonymous No.16093927]

Anyone have charts for these?
>Eliade
>Phenomenology

[Anonymous No.16093936]

>>16093927

[Anonymous No.16093997]

[Anonymous No.16094158]

>>16093927

[Anonymous No.16094193]

Bump for elliade chart

[Anonymous No.16094388]

>>16094158

[Anonymous No.16094422]

>>16093927
CHARTS
https://mega.nz/folder/JrhSyY6S#7qmTPol52TnmpFOdbag7RQ

[Anonymous No.16094438]

>>16094422
based
sadly no Eliade or Phenomenology

[Anonymous No.16095115]

is there a similar guide but for german?

[Anonymous No.16095351]

Anyone got one for essential french lit?

[Anonymous No.16095526]

>>16095351
Here, this was in the mega link. There are 3 other french ones but this is the most broad and comprehensive.

[Anonymous No.16095530]

>>16093927
>Phenomenology
Ended up just researching this all night. I'll try to make my own chart.

[Anonymous No.16095550]

>>16093927
AFAIK there is no chart for Eliade, we need to make one.

[Anonymous No.16095569]

>>16095526
Much obliged, thx

[Anonymous No.16095840]

Any one has the math chart, and maybe a chemistry one if someone made it?

What books should I read as I know nothing about chemistry and going to start a major in it in 2 months.

[Anonymous No.16095857]

>>16095840

[Anonymous No.16095868]

>>16095857
why is topology at the start somewhat gay chart.

[Anonymous No.16095895]

anyone has a chart for brazillian literature?

[Anonymous No.16095971]

[Anonymous No.16095974]

>>16095530
>Pre-Phenomenology
Socratese, Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Kant, Hegel
>Core Phenomonolgy German lineage
Husserl, Heidegger, Gadamer, Figal
>Core Phenomenology French lineage
Merlau-Ponty, Derrida, ...
>Obscure Endgame (Anti-)Phenomenology
Dalí, Arendt, C.G. Jung

[Anonymous No.16095977]

>>16093927
I know there are a few other eco-inspired charts. Does anyone have any of them?
I am also interested in charts that deal with theories concerning intellectual/spiritual/psychological history of mankind, (evolutionary) psychology, theories of civilization, etc., if any such ones exist

[Anonymous No.16096089]

>>16095977
don't have them handy at the moment unfortunately, but if I could add my two cents to that chart:
1) The traditionalists are kind of tangential to deep ecology. They're not incompatible, it's just they have two completely different focuses. Whilst the traditionalists view the industrial revolution as perhaps the most complete historical manifestation of the profane, that doesn't mean they deny the technology itself, just that they reject the spiritual state of mankind that was arguably a prerequisite to that technological development in the first place.
2) Derrick Jensen (and his book Endgame, which comprises two volumes) absolutely deserve to be in the Lefty An-Prim section. His work is steeped in critical theory and there's a lot I disagree with him on, but I still consider his work to be influential.
I'll give you some book recs for your requests, unfortunately I don't have charts.

[Anonymous No.16096109]

>>16096089
I haven’t read everything in the chart, nor did I make it. It’s obviously lacking some stuff (for example - David Skrbina’s “The Metaphysics of Technology”).
I was just posting it for a good reference of what I’d like. But thank you for your input, and your other recommendations if you get around to them

[Anonymous No.16096139]

>>16095977
For recs (fwiw I have absolutely nothing on evolutionary psychology).
I highly recommend getting Toynbee's 'A Study of History' (mainly available in the two Somervell abridged volumes) and reading that first, for a more comprehensive review that should satisfy your want for a "theory of civilization". I find that Evola's work (more-so than Guénon's), meshes quite well with most of what Toynbee said (not all), as an inner dimension to Toynbee's outward telling of history.
Guénon's 'The Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times' is worth reading.
Spengler may also be worth reading, I'll try to explain how his ideas relate to the traditionalists. When the traditionalists wrote about history, their main concern is in the outward manifestation of the traditional within history, and their belief is that the closer individuals approach the traditional, the fewer qualitative differences there are between them, as they approximate a singular truth. To this end, the traditionalists concern themselves more with the hierarchical structure within societies, and qualitative caste differences, since in a traditional society the higher castes will naturally embody the same principles as those of other traditional societies - and so horizontal differences between peoples and cultures, and mere physical race, were of little concern to the traditionalists.
Spengler is different in that he was decidedly a man of history and not of tradition, and when one properly understands how his schema fits into the greater picture, his "Ur Symbols" which lie at the heart of qualitative differentiation between rather than within cultures, already mark the fall from traditional principles, Adam and Eve's banishment from the garden of Eden as it were.
Given you're interested also in how history intersects with technology and ecology, aside from a universal recommendation of 'The Decline of the West' (I'm waiting for Arktos to publish a new unabridged translation), I think you'd also enjoy 'Man and Technics', which fits right in with that other material.

[Anonymous No.16096145]

>>16095974
>No Jaspers, Scheler, Marcel, Sartre, Sloterdijk, Hartmann, Marion or Levinas

[Anonymous No.16096152]

>>16095526
claqué au sol

[Anonymous No.16096161]

>>16096145
Jean-Luc Marion? I'm going to have a class taught by him this fall is he good?

[Anonymous No.16096177]

>>16096109
More recs. Eliade, I still need to re-read 'The Myth of the Eternal Return' and 'The Sacred and the Profane', to decide which I think is the best summation of his thesis, but Eliade himself recommended the former as an introduction to his works.
If you want more of an understanding of what "tradition" actually IS, rather than just holding it as a placeholder in your mind whilst reading the traditionalists, then I of course recommend Evola and Guénon's other works not focused on history, but tradition (with the caveat that I'm not familiar enough with the latter), I recommend Alan Watts' 'The Supreme Identity', and perhaps less strongly I recommend anything you can get your hands on of Coomaraswamy. I love his stuff, but it's hardly essential reading and is just the icing on the cake. His writing style was consistently academic and impenetrable. If you like reading chapters where the footnotes have a higher word count than the main body of text, or where every single sentence makes use of a word in Greek, Sanskrit, Farsi, German, Latin et al, then he might be up your street. But he's not for everyone.
If you want more philosophies of history, metahistories, theories of civilization, there are a few I haven't quite got round to yet which I nevertheless feel are promising. I feel I'm familiar enough with Joseph Tainter's work through watching some of his lectures, to be able to recommend 'The Collapse of Complex Societies', and I've just started Pitirim Sorokin's 'Social and Cultural Dynamics'.

[Anonymous No.16096211]

>>16095868
why not? it's just point sets and their properties

[Anonymous No.16096248]

>>16095840
Also need some chemistry if anyone has it or general recommendation. I can go to /sci/ but I don't trust them.

[Anonymous No.16096250]

>>16095977
I lied when I said I didn't have anything on evolutionary psychology, simply that it doesn't really interest me at all.
My brother got me a copy of Edward O. Wilson's 'The Social Conquest of Earth', which is just a book about the group selection hypothesis as opposed to the kin selection hypothesis.
I call them hypotheses, because that's exactly what they amount to. When juxtaposed, there is absolutely no empirical basis upon which to determine which is the more true, so all of the substance of the debate falls away to mere speculation, and yet is has been at the centre of a heated debate between proponents of group selection (Edward O. Wilson included), and proponents of kin selection (including Richard Dawkins, see 'The Selfish Gene').

In all, I couldn't give less of a flying toss about it.

[Anonymous No.16096303]

>>16095977
I should've also mentioned Joseph Campbell and Carl Jung as people who explored both psychology and myth. I just haven't read them yet.

[Anonymous No.16096329]

>>16095550
seconded

[Anonymous No.16096381]

Has anybody got a chart for diplomacy and international organisations?

[Anonymous No.16097243]

I finished a weird programme that had a lot of logic and little other math. I can tell that the first book here is great, can someone comment on the rest?

[Anonymous No.16097321]

>>16097243
I think this is overwrought. Someone with a reasonable grasp of basic numeracy could go straight from "How to Prove It" to Spivak's "Calculus".

For the individual who can't grok Spivak, I really do think something like Khanacademy is more appropriate. It will be faster and more motivating, then they can return to Spivak.

[Anonymous No.16097361]

>>16093927
>22 books on super stupid dumbasses
Yeah no thanks.

[Anonymous No.16097377]

>>16095868
Even though it's an obvious joke chart its placement of topology is one of the correct things.

[Anonymous No.16097395]

>>16097361
stfu brainlet go back to read harry potter

[Anonymous No.16097398]

>>16097321
I do this for fun and I don't mind doing things the slow way. I'll keep this in mind when I grow bored, but I've learned little new from Smith and I still find it worthwhile, if just for solidifying my basics and getting a different perspective on the material.

[Anonymous No.16097450]

>>16093927
Cool chart anon, I just finished Ancient Iraq and Myths From Mesopotamia, moving on to the others. Roux gives a good summary, however it's hard loose the details of specifics due to how compact the work is and how broad of a time it covers, however I enjoyed his writing style which seemed casual, but scholarly. Dalley gives good exposition to the myths, and decent translations, however be warned many text have missing words and such to reflect the tablets they were translated from. Regardless I really enjoyed Anzu, and the apocalytpic scenario presented in Erra and Ishum, a nice bonus is the illustrations of the characters and Gods at the end of the book. Also for anyone who doesn't know use this if your looking to get into a topic:
https://4chanlit.fandom.com/wiki/Charts

[Anonymous No.16097458]

>>16097243
Wayyyy to many books that are "supplemental" in nature that tell you "how to do math" when you should just dive in. If you read "How to Prove It" you shouldn't need to read "How to Solve It" or "Basic Mathematics" or "Concepts of Modern Mathematics", and you certainly don't need to have all of that shit just to lead up to Spivak/Apostol Calculus.

I have the following comments/mods:
-Starting with "Logic" by Smith is fine tbqfh
-Straight to "Elements of Set Theory", I guess the supplement is fine.
-Landau's Foundations of Analysis is actually underrated and a good selection.
-The three books after it are belaboring the point of preparation instead of jumping into a field. They're fine but reading all three as part of a curriculum starts to push more into the territory of "inefficient" than it is merely "thorough".
-After this, hit the main topics of undergrad math: analysis, topology, and abstract algebra.
-For analysis the classic is Rudin, although Abbott and Tao are accessible modern books that might be more up to date in presentation
-For Topology, Munkres will suffice
-For Abstract Algebra, either Jacobson, Dummit/Foote, or Aluffi will work. Dummit/Foote is encyclopedic and will drill you but Aluffi is more pedagogically modern and will prepare you to learn category theory, which has become increasingly entrenched in university mathematics.

[Anonymous No.16097494]

>>16097398
Look, I don't know half the books on the list and I'm not going to put in the effort to shit check it properly but I suspect you're being misled.
I've read How to Prove It, it's a VERY GENTLE book aimed at college freshmen who know basically nothing about logic. I've read Spivak's Calculus, it's a gentle book aimed at college freshmen or high achieving highschoolers.

Most notably, Spivak ENDS with a construction of the real numbers and lives at the end of the list. Landau apparently concerns itself with such constructions. This leads me to expect Landau and other books on this list are significantly more difficult than Spivak (the supposed endpoint).
It's not just that I don't like the chart, I suspect it of being a cruel joke.

[Anonymous No.16097516]

>>16093927
I wish they were translated into my language

[Anonymous No.16097524]

>>16097458
>For analysis the classic is Rudin
Speaking of cruel jokes

[Anonymous No.16097678]

>>16097494
>It's not just that I don't like the chart, I suspect it of being a cruel joke
These charts are almost always made by anons why have second-hand information about the books and almost never by those who have read many times more books and only chose the best. That's why I like to "crowdsource" some opinions before I go ahead and follow it. Thanks, for the warning, I'll try not to fall for any obvious prank and if something seems insurmountably cryptic all of a sudden, I'll know the reason why. Landau before Lang is highly suspicious indeed.
>>16097458
Thanks for the input anon, though most say that "some book on proofs" is a must.

[Anonymous No.16097738]

>>16097395
The Sumerians are to Harry Potter what modern civilization is to Moby Dick or Ulysses

[Anonymous No.16097751]

>>16097524
There is literally nothing wrong with Rudin.

[Anonymous No.16097978]

>>16097524
filtered lol Rudin is below average in difficulty for most western European curriculum

[Anonymous No.16098252]

>>16095974
>>16096145
Seems like you two should make the chart tbqh

[Anonymous No.16098358]

>>16098252
a competitive collaboration with lots of arrows pointing to how the other guy is a retard would really capture the spirit of /lit/

[Anonymous No.16098421]

the only worthwhile chart on /lit/

[Anonymous No.16098639]

>>16098358

[Anonymous No.16098665]

>>16098421
thanks anon

[Anonymous No.16099259]

>>16097458
>Abbott
it's not great imo, basically "proof left as an exercise" all the time after chapter 1

[Anonymous No.16100442]

[Anonymous No.16100538]

Does anyone have a mathematical theory chart?

im chaaaarting

[Anonymous No.16100607]

>>16096161
His book God Without Being is literally the most cited work of modern theology I believe, at least among those influenced by continental stuff.

[Anonymous No.16101049]

[Anonymous No.16101361]

>>16101049

[Anonymous No.16101576]

>>16095971
covers and letters could be bigger

[Anonymous No.16101588]

>>16101049
That statement on the bible is way off

[Anonymous No.16101621]

Anyone has the "books that trigger /lit/" chart?

[Anonymous No.16101642]

>>16100442
That's a seriously terrible chart.

A guide to reading Jung, made in the infographic format, would be about as detailed as the 3 Greek inforgraphics put together.

[Anonymous No.16101662]

Anyone has the "books that trigger /lit/" chart??

[Anonymous No.16101674]

>>16101049
This guy raises unintelligence to an art

[Anonymous No.16101777]

>>16098421
Yeah, religion is a human creation. Who'd a thunk it?

[Anonymous No.16101798]

>>16101576
>>16101642
Didn't make them - if you have better ones, you can post them

>>16101777
checked!

[Anonymous No.16102132]

It took all night but I think I've gathered enough information to make my own charts for both Eliade and Phenomenology. Tomorrow I'll start actually making them. Not sure what program would be best to use - anyone make one of these charts before? I know how to use Adobe products but I'm wondering if something more specialized exists.

[Anonymous No.16102200]

>>16101642
THEN WHAT ORDER DO I READ IN

TELL ME

[Anonymous No.16102287]

>>16101798
Go to hell

[Anonymous No.16102520]

>>16093927
Any charts on Islam?

[Anonymous No.16102728]

anyone got an economics chart? I want to start learning how to invest and at the same time learning basics of economy.

[Anonymous No.16102871]

>>16101049
>Filtered by Wealth of Nations

[Anonymous No.16104115]

>>16093936
List of books that should be banned?

[Anonymous No.16104765]

>>16095857
is this a real chart? I failed 1st year algebra in highschool and want to go back and relearn that stuff. I did well in Calculus and Geometry oddly enough

[Anonymous No.16104944]

>>16098421
Girard btfo Frazer

[Anonymous No.16105999]

>>16102287
>Whines about other people's images
>Refuses to post better ones
No one likes you.

[Anonymous No.16106017]

>>16102520
Just this esoteric one, but in the mega link there are a ton of islam charts

[Anonymous No.16106155]

>>16104765
Is a meme, anon

[Anonymous No.16106215]

>>16094422
respect